nik marked 2 inline comments as done and an inline comment as not done. nik added inline comments.
================ Comment at: include/clang/Lex/Preprocessor.h:391 } PreambleConditionalStack; + bool PreambleGenerationFailed = false; ---------------- ilya-biryukov wrote: > nik wrote: > > ilya-biryukov wrote: > > > There's a mechanism to handle preamble with errors, see > > > `PreprocessorOpts::AllowPCHWithCompilerErrors`. > > > Maybe rely on it and avoid adding a different one? > > I'm not sure how to make use of AllowPCHWithCompilerErrors. It's clearly > > meant as an input/readonly option - do you suggest setting that one to > > "false" in case we detect the cyclic include (and later checking for > > it...)? That feels a bit hacky. Have you meant something else? > We emit an error, so the preamble will **not** be emitted. > Unless the users specify `AllowPCHWithCompilerErrors`, in which case they've > signed up for this anyway. > > I propose to **not** add the new flag at all. Would that work? As stated further above, no. That's because for the libclang/c-index-test case, AllowPCHWithCompilerErrors=true - see clang_parseTranslationUnit_Impl. As such, the preamble will be generated/emitted as the second early return in PCHGenerator::HandleTranslationUnit is never hit. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D53866/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D53866 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
